It's getting to be that time of year. Every fall, information starts leaking out about upcoming sets. We are understandably excited about future offerings from LEGO and we understand that many of you have looked at leaked information, discussed it on other sites, and even hosted such leaked information on your own Brickshelf or Flickr accounts. However, we would like to remind you that the official policy of Classic-Castle is that we do not allow discussion of illegitimate leaks on our forums. There are a number of reasons for this:-To promote good relations with LEGO. Not that we're shills for them - heck, I'm happy to write bad reviews of product lines that I dislike or criticize their decisions at times. However, they have been good to us (e.g. donating prizes to the CCCs etc), and we have good personal relations with people at LEGO. Not needlessly spreading leaks is part of our respect for them.-Illegitimate leaks are often fuzzy, incomplete, very preliminary. Let's try to not get too overly excited or up in arms over something that may or may not be the final product. Heck, we've even seen preliminary versions of products in legitimate leaks, such as the Johnny Depp fig LEGO put in their ComicCon display-It's just bad form to promote illegitimate leaks. Let's face it, we can see "CONFIDENTIAL - copyright 2010 The LEGO Group - Not to be copied or disclosed- PRELIMINARY IMAGE" stamped all over some of the leaked pictures (yes, I've looked at them too). This means that someone, either at LEGO or at a retailer, violated some sort of non-disclosure. We, simply, don't want to be part of promoting a legally dubious activity as a website.

Anyway, we've got a lot of exciting stuff already to talk about - for instance, the series 2 collectible figs recently out in stores. I'm sure we'll get more legitimate information about future releases soon enough.

Note below for some discussion of 'illegitimate' versus 'legitimate' leaks:

9. Leaks. Classic-Castle does not allow illegitimate leaks of LEGO Company product information in our forums or chat. For a fuller discussion of legitimate vs illegitimate leaks read the FAQ. For example: Scans of new catalogs and brochures made by LEGO are ok to link to while set images, information, and names stolen from a retailers database or dealers catalog are not ok.

I found some leaked information about upcoming LEGO sets. Can I post it here?

Modified from this thread:

Classic-Castle.com is revising its policy on leaked information about future LEGO sets. In the past it was the policy that no discussion of leaks was permitted. This is being changed to allow for the discussion of "legitimate" leaks. This means that set information that was come accross in a legitimate manner is open for discussion. Some examples:

Information about sets posted to the public on commercial sites, like Harry Potter sets on the ToyWiz Website. As these are now publicly available, and ToyWiz is a legitimate LEGO retailer, such information is fair game for discussion.

Scans of officially released publications, such as LEGO Magazine, or catalogs in current sets.

Upcoming sets displayed by LEGO at an AFOL fest or a trade show, or information about upcoming sets distributed by LEGO through the Ambassadors or a particular fan site (e.g. if LEGO were to post information about an upcoming Star Wars set through FBTB).

Information on upcoming sets found at publicly available links at LEGO.com, even when those sets are not yet linked from the main shopping pages.

Photos of sets that have been made publicly available in stores, even if the store mistakenly put things on the shelf early.

Information that is obtained illegally is NOT open for discussion, even if you were not the person who did the original illegal act. Some examples:

A retail employee looking through the stores computer system for upcoming set names. This is proprietary information that the employee has no business looking for, so it is NOT open for discussion.

Scans from a retailers / distributors catalog. These catalogs are for use by stores in ordering future sets and are not for public discussion. Scans stolen from one of them are NOT open for discussion.

Information obtained from someone who had signed an NDA (Non-Disclosure Agreement). If they told you, it was a violation of their contract with LEGO. If you tell us, it is furthering the bad act, and we don't want to be part of it.

If you have a question about if something is appropriate, ask an admin BEFORE posting it and causing an uproar.